The rules for multiple checks need to be ironed out...

Allowing players to try skill checks over and over again is problematic. I think you should only be able to roll a skill check once. I would like to see a “retry” mechanic that does not allow you to reroll or automatically succeed (ala the current rules), but instead gives you a chance to automatically roll X number with X amount of time (based on your d20 and your skill die).


For example, I think you should get one skill roll. If you fail you can spend 20 rounds trying again, at which point you automatically roll 20 + ½ your skill die’s maximum value + your stat modifier. If that does not work you cannot succeed at the task until something about the situation changes. So, in 20 rounds you could use: a stat check to automatically generate 20 + your stat mod; a 1d4 skill check to automatically generate 22 + your stat mod; a 1d6 skill check to automatically generate 23 + your stat mod; a 1d8 skill check to automatically generate 24 + your stat mod; a 1d10 skill check to automatically generate 25 + your stat mod; a 1d12 skill check to automatically generate 26 + your stat mod. 

The 5e of D&D: its like a more balanced version of 2e, but with the character customization frills of 3e and 4e. I love it!

If there is a time constraint, only allow one check. If it's something you can pass or fail at outright, like disarming a trap, only once. Something like climbing or jumping, maybe failure means they fall down, get hurt and can try again. If it's something you could feasibly retry, like escape artist with a little time to work with, allow a few tries. For a Knowledge check, only once to see what they actually know about the subject. But if it's something that has no consequences for failure and there is no time constraint, it does not really need a skill check at all.

Should depend on the skill and the situation, not all skills are equal. There's no way a unified rule could work for this.
Yes, the rules need to be more clear on this.

For the most part, for jumps and falling into pits, I've been allowing PCs to fail one roll, and then roll a dexterity save DC 10 or 15 depending on the difficulty to catch the lip of the pit or cliff so that they don't fall to their deaths.  (I liked how Chris Perkins allowed players to do that in his Celebrity game)

With most other rolls, I've been granting one try each extended rest.  


 

A Brave Knight of WTF - "Wielder of the Sword of Balance"

 

Rhenny's Blog:  http://community.wizards.com/user/1497701/blog

 

 

Off the top of my head:

If the task can be attempted more than once, you can spend one round per point of DC, up to a maximum of your relevant ability score, to successfully accomplish the task. 

Example: You need to push a boulder over the edge of an outcrop so it will smash the ogre sleeping below. You need to roll a 16, but you only manage to roll a 10, plus your STR mod of 3 (17 strength), and a 1 on your skill die, totaling 14. Since your ability score is at least as high as the DC, you can spend 16 rounds pushing the boulder to achieve success.

EDIT:

OR

You can spend 20 rounds to roll your skill die and add it to your ability score. Repeat as necessary.

Something like that. 

You should only let your players roll once for a skill check unless they NEED to succeed for story purposes. An easy way to make this less painful is to allow players to "aid another" and give them advantage on the roll, retroactively. This basically means that you get 2 rolls per skill check if someone is aiding you. 

I wouldn't let the players reroll the skill check unless they came up with a plan to make it easier, such as using a rope or some other tool. Even then, its probably better to just boost the previous roll rather than letting them roll again.


I personally never really found this to be a problem though. My biggest concern is that if a party of 5 adventurers ALL get to make rolls for every challenge, then it is very unlikely that they ever fail. For things like stealth its fine since one person can fail the entire group, but for perception checks you only need one success and the whole group succeeds.


A simple solution to your problem though is to let them take a 10 automatically on their d20 roll if they have plenty of time to do whatever task. If a 10+ability mod + skill die isnt enough... then the task is impossible for them. Not sure if I would make the skill die be rolled or simply half of max value.

I don't think there's really a need to lay out something so concrete as this.  The real question for skill checks is "does it make sense to do this over and over?"  For something like scaling a wall, it's probably perfectly reasonable to be able to try more than once.  On the other hand, something like a knowledge check would clearly be something that you can't ever repeat (at least not until you stop by a library or something, anyway).  And then there's stuff in the middle, such as picking a specific lock.  Does a low roll mean that you messed up the handwork (the equivalent of slipping while trying to climb a wall) or does it mean that the lock happens to contain some mechanism that you aren't familiar with (the equivalent of failing a knowledge check)?  That's probably something that should be decided on a case by case basis depending on the situation (and the DM's judgment), not by the rules themselves.
I would also like some more guidance.


At present, I go with what feels appropriate - and that often means no more than one attempt per character.  Certainly knowledge checks don't get rerolls - you either know it or you don't.  And I really think that i at least some cases, strength checks ought to be in the same category.


Overall - I guess my feeling is that if the same character is doing the same thing,they should get the same result.  If you want to try again, tell me what you are doing differently.



My bigger dislike is "Me Too!" rolls.  Player one (the most skilled/ highest attribute candidate) tries something and fails - and everyone else grabs their dice and rolls as well.   I get around some of these through group checks.  But this doesn't always work.  


I almost wonder if a system that is sort of an inverse of the Aid another rules from an earlier edition might apply.  Since the "Me Too" rolls are clearly somewhat dependent upon each other (player 2 is only trying because player 1 already failed) - you treat the first roll as an 'assist' roll on the second character:  If the first character barely missed, the second roll has no modifier, but if the first character missed by five or more, the second roll has a penalty.


In game rationale (for example):  Player A is looking for something and fails his search.  Player B decides to search as well (knowing Player A didn't find anything).  He is less likely to find the object because he will tend to skip over specific places he just saw Player A search (and thus miss it because it was where Player A searched, he just didn't notice it).


In quick terms - for each character who searches and fails by five or more - those who search after knowing the result of Player As search have a -2 to their check.  (Or maybe we should just take this all the way to advantage).

Thoughts?  Or do you like "Me Too" rolls.

Oh - and to get back to the original topic of the same player re-attempting a task.  I can see the same general approach applying: You can try again but the odds of succeeding go down.  If you had a good chance to make it and just rolled crappy - you still have a decent chance to make it.  But if it was really barely possible at best and you didn't get lucky right away, you aren't going to succeed just because you kept rolling till you got a 20.


Carl
..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />I almost wonder if a system that is sort of an inverse of the Aid another rules from an earlier edition might apply.  Since the "Me Too" rolls are clearly somewhat dependent upon each other (player 2 is only trying because player 1 already failed) - you treat the first roll as an 'assist' roll on the second character:  If the first character barely missed, the second roll has no modifier, but if the first character missed by five or more, the second roll has a penalty.



"Aid Another" is the answer. Don't let the entire party do it separately, make each subsequent check apply a bonus to the original if it passed a certain DC, and maybe they can push the total up high enough to at least partially succeed.
..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />I almost wonder if a system that is sort of an inverse of the Aid another rules from an earlier edition might apply.  Since the "Me Too" rolls are clearly somewhat dependent upon each other (player 2 is only trying because player 1 already failed) - you treat the first roll as an 'assist' roll on the second character:  If the first character barely missed, the second roll has no modifier, but if the first character missed by five or more, the second roll has a penalty.



"Aid Another" is the answer. Don't let the entire party do it separately, make each subsequent check apply a bonus to the original if it passed a certain DC, and maybe they can push the total up high enough to at least partially succeed.



Same general idea.  The only issue is:  Do the later rolls modify the first roll or do the earlier rolls modify the later rolls.


The second feels more 'natural' to me, the first feels a bit gamey.


Carl  
Sign In to post comments